AH Blues

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by ValKehl

Rob, what you said may be technically correct, however, when I bid in an auction, I consider my bids to include whatever BP, if any, applies; I assume most collectors would agree with me.

I agree with what you say...I'm sure many do that. But it's because you've been conditioned to do so. That says nothing about why it should be that way.

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

I agree with what you say...I'm sure many do that. But it's because you've been conditioned to do so. That says nothing about why it should be that way.

A card (or pennant or slab with a pretty flip etc) with a market value of $1000 is up for auction.

Option 1) 0% buyer premium, 10% seller fee. Top bidder bids $1000. Top bidder pays $1k, auction house gets $100 and seller gets $900.

Option 2) 11.11% buyer premium, 0% seller fee. Top bidder bids $900. Top bidder pays $900 + [buyer premium of $900 x 11.11%] = $1k, auction house gets $100 and seller gets $900

Six in one, half dozen the other.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

A card (or pennant or slab with a pretty flip etc) with a market value of $1000 is up for auction.

Option 1) 0% buyer premium, 10% seller fee. Top bidder bids $1000. Top bidder pays $1k, auction house gets $100 and seller gets $900.

Option 2) 11.11% buyer premium, 0% seller fee. Top bidder bids $900. Top bidder pays $900 + [buyer premium of $900 x 11.11%] = $1k, auction house gets $100 and seller gets $900

Six in one, half dozen the other.

It's no use. Example after example is lost on this dude. He is honed in on the word BID, and his response will be that in your second example the BID was less and the buyer, not seller, had to "foot the bill" for the AH, whatever that means. I think we should all stop feeding this idiocy.

[RedsFan1941]

"I think we should all stop feeding this idiocy."

BINGO!

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

A card (or pennant or slab with a pretty flip etc) with a market value of $1000 is up for auction.

Option 1) 0% buyer premium, 10% seller fee. Top bidder bids $1000. Top bidder pays $1k, auction house gets $100 and seller gets $900.

Option 2) 11.11% buyer premium, 0% seller fee. Top bidder bids $900. Top bidder pays $900 + [buyer premium of $900 x 11.11%] = $1k, auction house gets $100 and seller gets $900

Six in one, half dozen the other.

You left out an option.

Option 3) Card still sells for $1,000 and the buyer has to pay an extra $111.10 and the seller gets $1,000.

The notion that every winning bid has been deflated by the value of the BP is ludicrous.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

This thread has become ludicrous. This, on the other hand, is Ludacris.
Carry on...

[x2drich2000]

Rob, in your example (option 3), the buyer now pays $1,111.10 total, not $1000. All you did was add an extra $100 in bids to option 2. So why if a bidder has $1000 to spend (options 1 & 2) would they not factor in ANY additional charges (buyers premium/shipping/service charges/handling/etc) and why would they place that extra $100 bid? If your answer is cause they did not count on the additional fees, please explain how the auction house is responsible for the buyer not reading the terms and conditions prior to bidding.

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Rob, in your example (option 3), the buyer now pays $1,111.10 total, not $1000. All you did was add an extra $100 in bids to option 2. So why if a bidder has $1000 to spend (options 1 & 2) would they not factor in ANY additional charges (buyers premium/shipping/service charges/handling/etc) and why would they place that extra $100 bid? If your answer is cause they did not count on the additional fees, please explain how the auction house is responsible for the buyer not reading the terms and conditions prior to bidding.

I don't mean to speak for Rob (nor could I), but I think his whole argument is based on the premise that there are a lot of dumb dudes in the hobby who bid irrationally and erroneously because they don't understand rules/math; and ironically, the more I read his posts, the more I think this premise might be accurate.

[Fballguy]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

I don't mean to speak for Rob (nor could I), but I think his whole argument is based on the premise that there are a lot of dumb dudes in the hobby who bid irrationally and erroneously because they don't understand rules/math; and ironically, the more I read his posts, the more I think this premise might be accurate.

That's exactly right. The notion that everyone adheres to the X minus 20% bidding approach is comical. And the notion that bidding is suppressed by the value of the BP is even more comical. I spent 10 minutes comparing sale prices at Heritage to Ebay and on my first try Heritage was...I kid you not...20% higher for the same PSA 5 1953 Mantle card.

These defenders of the BP are living in an illusion.

[x2drich2000]

OK, lets take your premise that the BP doesn't suppress the bidding and follow the logic. Why is that a bad thing for the auction house or the consignor? The auction house is in business to make money and the consignor wants to get as much as they can. Neither are responsible for the actions of a buyer. If the buyer overpays, both the consignor and auction house make more money. The buyer knows the rules before they place a bid and they choose to bid or not. The buyer is not forced to bid. If the buyer can get the same item cheaper on Ebay or wherever, then what is their motivation to bid in the auction? All the auction houses I've seen make the buyer's premium clear in the rules and usually include an example demonstrating how the fee works in connection with the bid. If some one is willing to voluntarily bid without reading the rules of the auction then that is their fault and no one else. It is not the consignor's or AH's job to protect people from themselves. Buyers need to be responsible for themselves.

Now Scott has very clearly outlined the history and reasons why the AH keep the seller's fee at 0%. So if it not the AH's job to stop people from bidding, and both the AH and consignor benefit from the masses of people who don't read the rules, how does changing to a 0% buyer's premium benefit the AH or the consignor?

In addition, I can't speak for others, but personally, I buy almost all the items I sell on Ebay from AH. How am I able to make money doing so if the AH with their 20% buyer's premium is more expensive and I'm also paying over 10% in Ebay fees when I sell the item?

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by Fballguy

You left out an option.

Option 3) Card still sells for $1,000 and the buyer has to pay an extra $111.10 and the seller gets $1,000.

The notion that every winning bid has been deflated by the value of the BP is ludicrous.

I know there are a lot of stupid people out there, but what percentage of people do you really think dont take the buyer's premium into account when making a bid? Maybe they do it once, then realize when they get the bill. Unless guys are knocking back a few beers waiting for extended bidding to end, I dont see your example coming into play often.

[Baseball Rarities]

Originally Posted by tiger8mush

A card (or pennant or slab with a pretty flip etc) with a market value of $1000 is up for auction.

Option 1) 0% buyer premium, 10% seller fee. Top bidder bids $1000. Top bidder pays $1k, auction house gets $100 and seller gets $900.

Option 2) 11.11% buyer premium, 0% seller fee. Top bidder bids $900. Top bidder pays $900 + [buyer premium of $900 x 11.11%] = $1k, auction house gets $100 and seller gets $900

Six in one, half dozen the other.

Exactly. It could not be any more straight-forward. I do not understand the confusion.